White-Collar Jobs Freeze Triggers MBA Applications Boom (msn.com)
- Reference: 0175310361
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/10/23/1659204/white-collar-jobs-freeze-triggers-mba-applications-boom
- Source link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/applications-to-m-b-a-programs-soar/ar-AA1sMnH6
> Today, the U.S. job market is strong, and unemployment remains low. But lower wage positions in retail and dining, as well as healthcare and government, have fueled much of the labor market's growth over the past two years.
>
> A white-collar job market downturn that began with tech workers in 2022 has spread to other sectors. Major employers including Goldman Sachs, Lyft, Microsoft and PricewaterhouseCoopers have laid off a combined tens of thousands of workers this year. Hiring for roles that usually require a bachelor's degree dropped below 2019 levels in recent months, according to payroll provider ADP. That slump has been steeper for 20-somethings, who are running into a bottleneck on the lower rungs of the corporate ladder as more established professionals stay put.
[1] https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/applications-to-m-b-a-programs-soar/ar-AA1sMnH6
Re: (Score:2)
> Have these people thought this through?
They're going by past trends, back when the "everyone to college" movement was still gaining steam, and adding more degrees to your resume made you more attractive to management. People are doing what they know. But the culture is reaching a realization point where we see that you don't even need a Bachelors for many jobs, let alone graduate degrees. So we're going to see a lot of people go into huge amounts of debt for MBA's that won't have the fiscal payoff they're hoping for. We joke about four year grad
And MBA is an investment in future discrimination (Score:3, Interesting)
> Have these people thought this through?
You're thinking from a macro standpoint. No MBAs are pretty worthless, IMHO. However, getting one gives you greater earning potential...so think of it as an investment in future discrimination working in your favor. Jobs requirements obviously fall into 2 categories: 1. what will benefit you at the job. 2. hoops you jump through to impress an employer. THE VAST MAJORITY of jobs that require a 4-year degree don't need it...it's just a way to weed out applicants...primarily from lower socio-economic cl
Signs point to a recession (Score:2)
So the point about unemployment remaining low is a bit misleading. Yes, it is low by historical standards, but 1) it's trending upwards, and 2) it sure [1]looks like the beginning of 6 of the last 7 recessions to me [stlouisfed.org]. The difference compared with 2008 is that back then there were a lot more people (as a percentage of the total population) in their working years. There are fewer working age adults now, so I think that will blunt the effect on unemployment and if I had to guess we'll max at about 6.5 or 7% une
[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE
It always looks like a recession (Score:4, Interesting)
always . Give me five minutes and Google and I can find 10 indicators of recession that are flagged. Because there's 1000 indicators and odds are some of 'em will be flagged at all times.
The Trump Tariffs will cause a recession, there's no question of that. They were about to until COVID hit and made things crazy. But those may or may not happen. If they don't we won't have a recession, but that doesn't mean we don't have problems. Technological unemployment is a thing. Good paying factory and programming jobs keep getting replaced with low paying service sector jobs. Unions could fix that for a time, maybe buy us enough time to reorganize, but we may or may not get that chance.
Ironically for all the damage COVID did it did buy us some more time.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless, of course, tariffs actually spur more domestic manufacturing. But I guess it won't 'cause everybody wants to be an internet infuencer.
Re: (Score:2)
"Unless, of course, tariffs actually spur more domestic manufacturing." ...at a higher price. There's a word for that.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless the tariffs cause other countries to respond in kind and manufacturing will in the U.S. will go down because we still export quite a lot. Then there is the secondary effects of higher tariffs all around cause a global recession and everybody loses, including the U.S.
Remember the first rule of the former alleged president: everything he touches turns to shit.
They don't. (Score:2)
Tariffs protect existing manufacturing they don't spur domestic manufacturing. You have to build it and then you can protect it.
Also you're not going to get a lot of jobs out of an increase in domestic manufacturing. We've had 45 years of non-stop automation. I remember seeing a story of a sleeping bag factory that had 120 employees and made enough sleeping bags for half the country. They closed down because they couldn't compete with cheap Chinese bags made by hand by slave labor and with no environme
The last thing we need is more MBAs (Score:2)
"Managers" with no clue about the business they are managing and a fetish for statistics will make things much worse.
Re: (Score:2)
This one reminded me of a Harvard MBA I worked with many years ago... Nice guy, but the company for which he was the CFO still went bankrupt.
Managers aren't really a thing anymore (Score:2)
Managers were created to keep watch on employees who might be Unionizing. Unions are still so weak that there are very few actual managers. Most are line workers who get stuck with a bit of extra paper work.
This is people in their 40s and 50s facing age discrimination and trying to buy time by getting an advanced degree and live off student loans and savings for a bit. That's all.
It's also a result of the growing technological unemployment we've had since the 1980s that we all just pretend isn't rea
Re: (Score:2)
And they can all work for parasite companies with "equity" and "capital" in their names
How meny people died at the hands of boeing MBA's? (Score:3)
How meny people died at the hands of boeing MBA's?
Re: (Score:2)
> How meny people died at the hands of boeing MBA's?
the civilian or military boeings?
Re: (Score:1)
>> How meny people died at the hands of boeing MBA's?
> the civilian or military boeings?
Yes.
Re: (Score:2)
"How meny people died at the hands of boeing MBA's?"
As many as died at the hands of Boeing engineers.
Re: (Score:1)
> "How meny people died at the hands of boeing MBA's?"
> As many as died at the hands of Boeing engineers.
As many engineers that love taking design shortcuts, especially with jetliners?
(I think we can stop pretending it’s the engineers beating the budget cuts drum. Ever.)
Re: (Score:2)
The government doesn't run the economy stupid, business does. Why is it \'s fault when a company decides to cut staff to make the end of the year numbers look good for their bonuses. The next few weeks will be full of such news, they are just waiting for the election to occur first so people will assume that is the reason. Blaming the government for things they don't control, like the weather, is a wonderful distraction device to keep you from looking for the real causes. Don't fall for it.
Re: (Score:1)
> The government doesn't run the economy stupid, business does. Why is it \'s fault when a company decides to cut staff to make the end of the year numbers look good for their bonuses. The next few weeks will be full of such news, they are just waiting for the election to occur first so people will assume that is the reason. Blaming the government for things they don't control, like the weather, is a wonderful distraction device to keep you from looking for the real causes. Don't fall for it.
If government isn’t to blame, fine. I won’t “fall” for it when same said government gets on TV and starts bragging about all those jobs they “created”. No credit where credit isn’t due from now on.
Government doesn’t get to brag about bullshit “create jobs” numbers when they’re good, and then claim “not it” when those numbers go to shit.
Oh no (Score:2)
More terrible managers coming!
Great (Score:5, Funny)
All we need is few more MBA's to make the world a better place.
Re: (Score:2)
More MBAs would make the world a better place though. They just need to be at the bottom of the ocean. It's always the little implementation details that get you if you're not careful.
Re:Great (Score:4, Insightful)
Do you think someone with a technical background who earns an MBA just instantly turns into a corporate shill or a retard or something? Did you ever think that maybe people who have technical skills might want to learn about management so that they could one day be management in the hopes of improving things with their experience and perspective?
This site has so many people on the spectrum with a superiority complex, who think they know everything about everything. It's hilarious how many obviously have no clue what they're talking about, like when they describe fiduciary responsibility as a legal requirement to choose profits over morals or anything else.
Re: (Score:3)
> Do you think someone with a technical background who earns an MBA just instantly turns into a corporate shill or a retard or something? .
Yes.
I think there's a Dilbert cartoon or two that covers this fact.
Re: Great (Score:4, Informative)
Not only that. The [1]Dilbert Principle [wikipedia.org] was inpired in that very idea.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilbert_principle
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't the Dilbert Principle about failing upwards or promoting incompetent people to get them out of the way? What do either of those have to do with getting an MBA? How does someone getting an MBA make them incompetent?
Re: (Score:1)
Yep, this is absolutely true. Every engineer that does an MBA, becomes a shill eventually (give or take few years).
Re: (Score:2)
"Do you think someone with a technical background who earns an MBA just instantly turns into a corporate shill or a retard or something? "
I know a couple of engineers who had MBAs who remained decent, then the goodwill was lost when a different MBA talked Management into going SAP.
You know that saying about one aw-shit cancelling out a thousand atta-boys?
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
If the MBA's are technical people with industry experience going back to make themselves more marketable then I have no problem with them.
In my experience the vast majority of MBA's that I have encountered in the workplace jumped from 4 year degree to MBA and come out the other end thinking they could manage anything. Those individuals who lacked the industry experience really only understood some finance concepts and ultimately drove things into the ground for about eight to ten years until they were all let go in a mass layoff. Following which we returned to growth and a healthy work culture.
Many of us who are bitter about MBA's lived through the explosion of inexperienced MBA's in the 2000's. We have solid reasons for why we cringe when we hear there is a surge in people getting MBA's.
I do have respect for some folks I have worked with who went back for their MBA who were solid engineers beforehand. They were good leaders. But, they were also good leaders before they got their MBA. The MBA was really just a way for them to add the skills they needed to become ready for higher levels of leadership or to gain the attention of higher levels to prove they could rise up the ranks.
Re: (Score:2)
> The MBA was really just a way for them to add the skills they needed to become ready for higher levels of leadership or to gain the attention of higher levels to prove they could rise up the ranks.
This is exactly why I went to night classes to earn my MBA while working a full time corporate IT job which often required international travel. I was so sick and tired of management having no clue what they were talking about or what they were selling to clients and then turning around and asking me to build. I tried to stylize my career as someone who spoke both languages, tech and business. So far its worked out pretty well for me.
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking for yourself, good job. If I had to take night classes along with my full time job, I'd fire my employer.
Re: (Score:1)
money honey
Re: (Score:2)
In my 16 years in the corporate world, I have seen this happen before my eyes at least half a dozen times. Not only did they turn into shills, they came out of those programs dumber than they were before,
Re: (Score:2)
> In my 16 years in the corporate world, I have seen this happen before my eyes at least half a dozen times. Not only did they turn into shills, they came out of those programs dumber than they were before,
Wait until you've been in the corporate world for over thirty years. You'll see it literally dozens more times. I've begun to suspect there is a deprogramming class for any knowledge you bring into an MBA program. Can't have knowledge sullying the profit worship. It is, after all, the new church. Thinking is verboten.
Re: (Score:2)
I think its more garbage in, garbage out. If you go in looking to learn how to best exploit people for your own personal gain, then yeah that is probably what you're going to focus on and learn the most about. If you go into an MBA program hoping to understand all of the behind the scenes stuff that you typically aren't involved with, then you're much more likely to come out with a better understanding of why businesses operate the way they do.
Re: (Score:2)
> Do you think someone with a technical background who earns an MBA just instantly turns into a corporate shill or a retard or something?
To a certain degree they do (or at least usually). Managing up is a big part of managing in general and usually is the only options when it comes to self preservation. Up wants what it wants. It might be good things if Up happens to be a founder or someone with a deep love of the product but if they are more interested in financial engineering, or marketing theory, angling for their own next big opportunity than in the specifics of what your organization is trying to do - well you have to get interested in
Re: (Score:2)
"...no clue what they're talking about, like when they describe fiduciary responsibility as a legal requirement to choose profits over morals or anything else."
What's the correct definition, in your view?
Re: (Score:2)
> "...no clue what they're talking about, like when they describe fiduciary responsibility as a legal requirement to choose profits over morals or anything else."
> What's the correct definition, in your view?
Executive officers and board members are supposed to act with the best interests of their stakeholders, not just shareholders, in mind. Stakeholders include customers, employees, business partners, suppliers, governments, etc. Shareholders could still technically sue a CEO or board of directors for turning down a deal to save $1 billion dollars by polluting a town's drinking water and paying a $1 million dollar fine. Some people act like its imperative to ignore everything in the name of profit. And again,
Re: (Score:2)
> Do you think someone with a technical background who earns an MBA just instantly turns into a corporate shill or a retard or something?
In my experience they tend to forget with alacrity whatever technical knowledge they ever had.
> Did you ever think that maybe people who have technical skills might want to learn about management so that they could one day be management in the hopes of improving things with their experience and perspective?
Hardly - they want more status, money, and not having to use their brains too much.
> This site has so many people on the spectrum with a superiority complex, who think they know everything about everything. It's hilarious how many obviously have no clue what they're talking about, like when they describe fiduciary responsibility as a legal requirement to choose profits over morals or anything else.
Like e.g. the Boeing management in the last quarter of a century?
Re: (Score:2)
>> Did you ever think that maybe people who have technical skills might want to learn about management so that they could one day be management in the hopes of improving things with their experience and perspective?
> Hardly - they want more status, money, and not having to use their brains too much.
Stop projecting
Logicectomy (Score:1)
I started on an MBA degree a couple of decades ago to hopefully avoid the risks of ageism in IT, and eventually realized it's mostly fluff and BS. I had to shower after each class.
If I liked fluff and BS I wouldn't go into a technical field to begin with. (Current) machines are roughly 70% logical while humans 10%. That's a big downgrade, hard to swallow. I'd need a logicectomy to continue.
I'm not saying an MBA won't help one's career, only that it's difficult to endure. It's PHB Bootcamp.
Re: (Score:2)
I did the same. I made it through 3 classes before I stopped. You?
Re: (Score:2)
I mean 3 one hour class sessions, not 3 full classes. 3 hours was agony.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it is either become a cost cutting corporate shill, or wander the wastelands of non-profit organizations, and even there you will run in more than a few corporate-types who want to bring their shoddy wares into markets where non-profit status is used to ensure quality over concern for shareholder value
Re:Great [humor potential] (Score:2)
Mod parent funny, but the story has much more potential. If I could write jokes I think mine might be "some of my best friends are MBAs"...
(Seriously, I did help one of my oldest friends earn his MBA, but he grew up to be a 'relatively useful' CPA in spite of the MBA diversion.)
Re: (Score:2)
And lawyers
Re: (Score:2)
There are a lot of baby boomers still working because they didn't save well for retirement, or because they don't know what to do with the free time they'd have after retiring. Multiple sources. Here's one: [1]https://finance.yahoo.com/news... [yahoo.com]
[1] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/retirement-no-retirement-baby-boomers-160306854.html